# Fix list: Scrapeless From Anchor Terminal's listing at https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/scrapeless, the October 2026 research run, assessed 1 October 2026. Grade C, 54.3 out of 100. This is everything the published grade says the listing lacks, the biggest possible gain to the total first. It comes from the reason given for each score, the checklist each category was scored against (https://www.anchorterminal.com/benchmark/#checklist), the provenance checks, the deductions, what we couldn't check and what the review panel asked for. A fix counts at the next check, once it's public. For a coding agent working on Scrapeless: work through the items below in the product, its docs and its public pages. Each category gives the reason for its score, with the points each checklist item earned, and the checklist itself, so the gap is the items that earned less than their points. Change the product, not the wording, and keep a note of what you changed and where it's published. ## 1. Security & auth, 35 out of 100, up to 11.4 more on the total Why it scored 35: One API token per account, sent in the x-api-token header, which the docs say can be replaced and invalidated from the dashboard or through support. No scopes (20). Agent Browser WebSocket connections pass the token as a URL parameter, a documented option, so less 10 (10 of 30). No read-only mode, and the browser tools can click and type on third-party sites without any confirmation step (5 of 20). The MCP README has a security section that calls web data untrusted by default and warns against passing raw scraped content into prompts, with no in-tool mitigation (10 of 15). Browser sessions are recorded, and we found no request log for the other APIs (5 of 15). security.txt valid per the 30 September check. No bug bounty, SOC 2 or ISO 27001 found (5 of 20). The checklist (https://www.anchorterminal.com/benchmark/#checklist-security): - 0 to 30, the credential model. 30 for OAuth 2.1 with scopes, or scoped and revocable keys with rotation. 20 for plain revocable API keys. 10 for one all-powerful key. 10 off when a secret can travel in a URL query string as a documented option. - 0 to 20, read-only or least-privilege modes, and confirmation or approval for destructive actions. - 0 to 15, prompt-injection posture where the tool returns untrusted content (documented mitigations or guidance). A tool that returns no untrusted content gets 10. - 0 to 15, audit logs or per-call visibility for the operator. - 0 to 20, a security programme. security.txt or a disclosure policy, a bug bounty, SOC 2 or ISO 27001, advisories handled in public. Models are read for retention, whether API data trains models (and whether that's off by default), zero-retention options and certifications. Frameworks for telemetry defaults, approval hooks, guardrails and sandboxing. ## 2. Agent ergonomics, 50 out of 100, up to 8.1 more on the total Why it scored 50: 25 MCP tools, 16 of them browser actions, with no toolsets or read-only subset (15 of 25). crawl_start takes limit and maxDepth, but scrape_markdown and scrape_html take only a URL, with no size or selector control (10 of 20). The MCP returns status_code, a code of rate_limited or api_error, and the upstream message. No API error catalogue found (10 of 20). No readOnlyHint or destructiveHint annotations and no idempotency guidance (0). Most tools need only a URL, and official SDKs exist for Node and Python (15). The checklist (https://www.anchorterminal.com/benchmark/#checklist-ergonomics): - 0 to 25, context cost. For MCP, the number and size of the tool definitions (25 for ten or fewer compact tools, 15 for 11 to 30, 5 for more than 30, plus up to 10 back for toolsets, dynamic loading or read-only subsets). For APIs, whether responses can be sized (field selection, limits, summaries). - 20, pagination, filtering and output-size controls. - 20, actionable, documented error responses, codes and messages an agent can recover from. - 20, idempotency or safe retries, and for MCP the `readOnlyHint` and `destructiveHint` annotations. - 15, sensible defaults, few required parameters, and official SDKs in at least two languages. Models are read for tool use, structured output, prompt caching, context length, batch and SDKs. Frameworks for how much code and how many defaults a tool-calling agent with MCP needs. ## 3. Payments & pricing, 35 out of 100, up to 8.1 more on the total Why it scored 35: No x402, MPP or L402. Crypto top-ups exist but aren't a machine payment protocol (0). Per-unit prices are public, Web Unlocker $1 per 1,000 on Basic per the 30 September check, but the pricing page renders them client-side and the site's llms.txt still quotes Deep SerpApi at $0.1 per 1,000 (15 of 20). The trial activates on signup and the Agent Browser FAQ gives 1 browser hour a month with no card (20). A person signs up in a browser (0). The checklist (https://www.anchorterminal.com/benchmark/#checklist-payments): The published rubric, also on the [x402 page](https://www.anchorterminal.com/x402/). - 40, a machine payment protocol (x402, MPP or L402) on the tool's own endpoints. 10 to 30 when it covers only some endpoints or only goes through a third party, and the note says which. - 20, per-call or per-unit pricing published without a login. 10 for public plan-only pricing, 0 for "contact sales" or prices behind a login. - 20, a free tier or trial that doesn't need a card. - 20, autonomous onboarding, meaning an agent can get access without a person signing up in a browser (keyless use, x402, a programmatic key API). Payment platforms and agent wallets rarely charge for their own API over a machine protocol, so the first line has steps for them, and the highest one that applies counts. 40 when x402, MPP or L402 runs on all their own endpoints, 30 when it runs on part of their own API, 25 when their merchants can accept one, 20 for running a facilitator, 15 for paying as a buyer, and 0 when the only protocol is their own. Merchant acceptance sits above a facilitator because the platform's own customers can charge agents through it, while a facilitator settles for sellers who wire up the protocol themselves. The counter-argument (a facilitator does more for the protocol as a whole) has a point. Each note says which step applied. Open-source software you run yourself is scored on its hosted or paid option if it has one. A free, self-hosted package with nothing to buy gets 20, 20 and 20 for the last three lines, and 0 to 40 for the first only if it ships a payment protocol. ## 4. Schema & documentation, 66 out of 100, up to 5.5 more on the total Why it scored 66: No OpenAPI spec found. The API reference at apidocs.scrapeless.com lists about 30 schema definitions in its llms.txt, and the 25 MCP tools have typed zod inputs, one of which (crawl_start scrapeOptions) takes a free-form record (15 of 25). llms.txt with Markdown pages for every endpoint (10). MCP descriptions carry Restrictions, Valid and Invalid lines for most tools, though google_search's description is a run-on fragment (15 of 20). Inputs are typed with URL validation and some enums, plus the one free-form record (11 of 15). Request examples on each reference page, but no documented error responses or error code list found (7 of 15). Versioned API paths (v1, v2) and a CHANGELOG.md in the MCP repo, but no product changelog (8 of 15). The checklist (https://www.anchorterminal.com/benchmark/#checklist-schema): APIs and MCP servers. - 25, a machine-readable contract (a public OpenAPI file or similar; for MCP, typed JSON Schema inputs on every tool). - 10, llms.txt or Markdown docs served for agents. - 0 to 20, descriptions that say what a tool is for, when to use it and when not to, read from the tool definitions in the source or the API reference. - 0 to 15, typed inputs with enums, constraints and required fields, and no free-form JSON blobs. - 0 to 15, examples and documented error responses. - 15, versioning and a public changelog. Models are read from the API reference, the OpenAPI file, llms.txt, the structured-output and tool-use docs and the model cards. Frameworks from docs a model can follow, typed interfaces, examples and the API reference. ## 5. Reliability, 75 out of 100, up to 5 more on the total Why it scored 75: Better Stack status page at status.scrapeless.com with four components, API, Scraping Browser, website and dashboard, and residential proxies (20). No incidents in the last 90 days and every component shows 100 per cent for 30, 60 and 90 days (30). Concurrency per plan is published in the pricing data, 50 browser sessions and 100 unlocker requests on Basic per the 30 September check, but no per-minute rate limits (10 of 15). No 429 or retry guidance found in the docs or API reference (0). The pricing page lists an SLA on Enterprise, but no SLA terms are published (5 of 10). The APIs are generally available (10). The checklist (https://www.anchorterminal.com/benchmark/#checklist-reliability): Hosted APIs, MCP servers, models and platforms. - 20, a public status page with component history (Statuspage, Instatus, BetterStack or the vendor's own). - 0 to 30, the incident record for the last 90 days on that page. 30 for a clean record or trivial incidents only, 20 for minor incidents only, 10 for one major outage (an hour or more of a core API down, or errors across the board), 0 for several. 5 when there's no history we could read, and the note says so. - 15, rate limits documented with numbers. - 15, documented 429 or overload handling (Retry-After, backoff guidance), and idempotency keys or safe-retry guidance where writes are involved. - 10, an SLA published for any paid tier. - 10, the surface agents use is generally available, not beta or preview. Local packages, SDKs, frameworks and stdio MCP servers. - 20, installs from an official package with supported runtimes stated. - 25, a public CI and test suite, passing on the default branch. - 0 to 25, open crash or regression issues relative to activity (25 for few and handled, 0 for many, old and unanswered). - 15, semver discipline and breaking changes called out in a changelog. - 15, version 1.0 or later, or declared stable. Protocols are read from their reference implementations, the public facilitators or servers, spec stability and test vectors. ## 6. Transparency & trust, 56 out of 100, up to 3.9 more on the total Made of editorial 30, provenance 82. Why it scored 56: The MCP server is open source but the LICENSE file says MIT while package.json says ISC. The API is closed, and the terms name NST LABS TECH LTD. with no address or governing law (15 of 30). The privacy policy gives no retention periods beyond tokens kept 24 hours, names two processors (Intercom and Airwallex), and mentions no DPA (10 of 30). No deprecation policy or dated notices found (0). Two processors named, no data locations (5 of 20). The checklist (https://www.anchorterminal.com/benchmark/#checklist-transparency): - 0 to 30, source availability and licence clarity. 30 for open source under an OSI licence, 15 for closed with clear terms, 0 for unclear terms. - 0 to 30, data handling and retention statements that agree with each other (privacy policy, DPA, retention periods, subprocessors). - 0 to 20, a deprecation policy or notices with dates. - 0 to 20, telemetry disclosed with an opt-out (local software), or subprocessors and data locations disclosed (hosted). The other half of Transparency and trust is the provenance score, computed from checked facts (below). The category score is the mean of the two. Provenance checks not met in full (half of this category, computed from checked facts): - Domain age: scrapeless.com, registered 2024-06-13 (2 years) (7 of 15) - Changelog: not found (0 of 10) ## 7. Maintenance & community, 81 out of 100, up to 1.7 more on the total Why it scored 81: SDK v1.12.1 on 2026-09-16 (30). MCP server v0.5.0, v0.6.0, v0.6.1 and v0.6.3 between 20 August and 8 September, plus SDK v1.12.0 and v1.12.1 (20). One open MCP issue (#10, 12 August 2026, the server hanging when only SCRAPELESS_API_KEY is set). The code now reads that variable first, but the issue is still open. Discord channel linked from the README (12 of 25). Listed in the official MCP registry as io.github.scrapeless-ai/scrapeless-mcp-server, and Node and Python SDKs are current (15). No CI workflow in the MCP repo, only an npm publish workflow in the SDK repo, and the MCP pins @modelcontextprotocol/sdk at ^1.8.0 (4 of 10). The checklist (https://www.anchorterminal.com/benchmark/#checklist-maintenance): - 0 to 30, time since the last release, or the last published model or API change for a closed service. 30 within 30 days, 20 within 90, 10 within 180, 0 older. - 20, at least three releases or dated changelog entries in the last 90 days. - 0 to 25, responsiveness. Issues and pull requests answered on GitHub (the open issues and how recent the replies are). For closed services, a public changelog and a support or community channel that answers, 0 to 15. - 15, presence in the official MCP registry under a verified namespace (MCP servers), or current official SDKs (APIs and models). - 10, package health, current dependencies and CI. Models are read for deprecation notice periods and model churn rather than release counts. ## Deductions Each comes off the total. A fixed and documented problem counts for less at the next check. - 2026-10-01: the agent-facing llms.txt at https://www.scrapeless.com/llms.txt quotes Deep SerpApi at $0.1 per 1,000 requests, while the plan data behind https://www.scrapeless.com/en/pricing charged $1 per 1,000 for Google Search on Basic when checked on 2026-09-30. A tenfold understatement in the file agents read (-2). ## What we couldn't check What we couldn't read counted as absent. Publishing it on a page a plain HTTP fetch can read (not only in a browser) lets the next check count it. - unchecked: unit prices today. The pricing page renders them client-side and our reader saw none, so the figures are from the 30 September check - Whether failed requests are billed. Not found on the pricing page or in the docs - Whether Deep SerpApi at $0.1 per 1,000 in llms.txt is a retired product name or a stale price - unchecked: replies on GitHub issues beyond the single open one, since the issue search is blocked to our reader ## Weaknesses - llms.txt quotes Deep SerpApi at $0.1 per 1,000 while the plan data charges $1 per 1,000 for Google Search - No error catalogue, no 429 or retry guidance and no per-minute rate limits in the docs - The 25 MCP tools have no readOnlyHint or destructiveHint annotations, and the browser tools can type and click without confirmation - Terms and privacy policy name NST LABS TECH LTD. with no address, jurisdiction, retention periods or DPA - Agent Browser WebSocket URLs carry the API token as a query parameter ## What costs an agent a turn today The notes we give agents before they call it. Each one is a workaround an agent shouldn't need. - Use scrape_markdown for reading pages and save the browser_* tools for clicks and logins, since browser time bills by the hour - Call browser_close when done so the session and its billing stop - Set limit on crawl_start. Unset, it defaults to 10,000 pages - Crawls are asynchronous. Call crawl_start, then poll crawl_result with the returned id - Set SCRAPELESS_API_KEY for the stdio server. Older guides use SCRAPELESS_KEY, which still works as a fallback ## What the review panel asked for - fix the llms.txt price - state whether failed requests bill - toolsets - size limits on scrapes ## When it's done Send what changed and where it's published as a dispute (https://www.anchorterminal.com/builders/#disputes, or `POST https://www.anchorterminal.com/api/v1/contact` with `"kind": "dispute"`). Disputes are answered in public, and the listing is checked again by the same checklist. Paying for an audit or a listing claim changes nothing here.